politics and politicians
See other politics and politicians Articles
Title: BREAKING : Mark Levin “You Should Be Very Proud of Your President -a REAL Commander in Chief”
Source:
truthfeed.com
URL Source: http://truthfeed.com/breaking-mark- ... real-commander-in-chief/63246/
Published: Apr 8, 2017
Author: Amy Moreno
Post Date: 2017-04-08 09:56:09 by Gatlin
Keywords: None
Views: 18508
Comments: 81
Conservative talk show powerhouse Mark Levin praised President Trump’s airstrikes against a Syria airbase, saying, “that’s a real leader.” After eight years of feckless, dithering foreign policy from Obama and his administration, it’s refreshing to see STRENGTH and confidence back in the White House. On Thursday President Trump launched 59 Tomahawk missiles at a Syrian airbase believed to be housing chemical weapons. The U.S. attack was retaliation for a Syrian chemical attack on Tuesday that killed innocent women and children.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 35.
#6. To: Gatlin (#0)
There is absolutely no proof that the attack was ordered and orchestrated by Assad.
There is absolutely no proof that the attack was ordered and orchestrated by Assad. And there is absolutely no proof that a Tomahawk missile attack was ordered and orchestrated against Assad. Latest reports show him alive and well….he was not attacked. However, the Syrian air base from which the chemical attack was launched is a different matter. There are reports of heavy damage …
There are reports of heavy damage … There were fighter/bombers taking off from it today to fly bombing missions.
There were fighter/bombers taking off from it today to fly bombing missions. Of course there were Syrian aircraft taking off today from the air field. It was never expected there would not be. In fact two Syrian jets already took of from the air base on Friday that was hit by the 58 Tomahawk missiles early Friday morning. They also took off yesterday….and again today, as you stated. But there were 26 less Syrian aircraft available to ever take off from that air base….since they were destroyed in the missile strikes. There were 58 hits with Tomahawks to destroy those aircraft, along with infrastructure, the air defense radar and control center, work shops and the fuel depot. All this means heavy damage in English and the same أضرار جسيمة in Arabic. It was never the intent to pothole the runway to prevent usage. That would have been a waste of missiles since all potholes could have been repaired within hours anyway….for any surviving aircraft to start taking off Friday and continuing through the weekend. But take a look at this … This was the damage done only by two missiles. Stop and visualize this kind of damage to 56 other facilities and you should have a very good idea of what was meant by the usage of the term “heavy damage.” Again: All this means heavy damage in English and the same أضرار جسيمة in Arabic. You disagree? Are you saying there was not heavy damage? Edit Add: There were fighter/bombers taking off from it today to fly bombing missions. Of course there were Syrian aircraft taking off today from the air field. It was never expected there would not be. In fact two Syrian jets already took of from the air base on Friday that was hit by the 58 Tomahawk missiles early Friday morning. They also took off yesterday….and again today, as you stated. But there were 26 less Syrian aircraft available to ever take off from that air base….since they were destroyed in the missile strikes. There were 58 hits with Tomahawks to destroy those aircraft, along with infrastructure, the air defense radar and control center, work shops and the fuel depot. All this means heavy damage in English and the same أضرار جسيمة in Arabic. It was never the intent to pothole the runway to prevent usage. That would have been a waste of missiles since all potholes could have been repaired within hours anyway….for any surviving aircraft to start taking off Friday and continuing through the weekend. But take a look at this … This was the damage done only by two missiles. Stop and visualize this kind of damage to 56 other facilities and you should have a very good idea of what was meant by the usage of the term “heavy damage.” Again: All this means heavy damage in English and the same أضرار جسيمة in Arabic. You disagree? Are you saying there was not heavy damage? Edit Add: Russia said only 23 of the 59 missiles fired from US warships hit their mark, but that six Syrian jets and several buildings were destroyed in the attack. Another report says nine Syrian jets were destroyed.
Yes, The shelter they were in wasn't even destroyed,and there is something wrong about those photos. If those jets had been destroyed by missile strikes,why are the roofs still standing?
Yes, The shelter they were in wasn't even destroyed,and there is something wrong about those photos. For every question….there is a logical answer. The missiles penetrated through the roofs and left the roofs still standing….after penetrating through the roofs, the missiles hit and destroyed the aircrafts under the roofs. That’s exactly what happened …
Maybe they have some reason to want to damage the roof. However, they do brag that the Tomahawk can fly a thousand miles and hit a tenth-floor window with pinpoint precision so they could have flown them into the big open doors instead of punching through the roof. I suppose those kind of aircraft shelters looked very formidable back in the Sixties and Seventies. I assume that is when they were built.
The Tomahawks carry a payload of 1,000 lbs of high explosive. Does anyone SERIOUSLY believe there would even be a truck load of rubble left if a couple of those babies had hit those revetments? I see no displaced blocks,or even cement fragments. I do see soot from a burning fire,and what looks like a couple of jet fighters that might have been set on fire,though.
#37. To: sneakypete, redleghunter, Tooconservative, All (#35)
The Tomahawks carry a payload of 1,000 lbs of high explosive. You should not believe what your lying eyes tell you, Pete. If you are not objectively seeking the truth….your lying eyes will tell you exactly what you want to see and omit what you don’t want to see. That’s the pure and simple truth….from “once upon a time” directly to you.
I see no displaced blocks,or even cement fragments. I do see soot from a burning fire,and what looks like a couple of jet fighters that might have been set on fire,though. Depends on the warhead.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestThe U.S. attack was retaliation for a Syrian chemical attack
#8. To: Deckard (#6)
(Edited)
The U.S. attack was retaliation for a Syrian chemical attack
#18. To: Gatlin (#8)
However, the Syrian air base from which the chemical attack was launched is a different matter.
#20. To: sneakypete (#18)
(Edited)
There are reports of heavy damage …
In a photo released by the Russian state-owned news outlet, Sputnik, the remains of two planes are seen
underneath a shelter following the U.S. missile attack on an air base in Syria, April 7, 2017.
Russia said only 23 of the 59 missiles fired from US warships hit their mark, but that six Syrian jets and several buildings were destroyed in the attack. There are reports of heavy damage …
In a photo released by the Russian state-owned news outlet, Sputnik, the remains of two planes are seen
underneath a shelter following the U.S. missile attack on an air base in Syria, April 7, 2017.
#25. To: Gatlin (#20)
Are you saying there was not heavy damage?
#27. To: sneakypete, redleghunter, Tooconservative (#25)
Are you saying there was not heavy damage?
Uh, hello Pete, they were not destroying the shelters….they were destroying the aircraft in the shelters. If those jets had been destroyed by missile strikes,why are the roofs still standing?
#29. To: Gatlin, sneakypete (#27)
The missiles penetrated through the roofs and left the roofs still standing….after penetrating through the roofs, the missiles hit and destroyed the aircrafts under the roofs.
#35. To: Tooconservative (#29)
The missiles penetrated through the roofs and left the roofs still standing….after penetrating through the roofs, the missiles hit and destroyed the aircrafts under the roofs.
Replies to Comment # 35. The missiles penetrated through the roofs and left the roofs still standing….after penetrating through the roofs, the missiles hit and destroyed the aircrafts under the roofs.
The Tomahawk has a wide variety of warheads configured for different target objectives. Does anyone SERIOUSLY believe there would even be a truck load of rubble left if a couple of those babies had hit those revetments?
I do, see why in Post 36. I see no displaced blocks,or even cement fragments. I do see soot from a burning fire,and what looks like a couple of jet fighters that might have been set on fire,though.
Pete, you are a classic example of why science tells us not to rely on eyewitness accounts.
#59. To: sneakypete (#35)
Does anyone SERIOUSLY believe there would even be a truck load of rubble left if a couple of those babies had hit those revetments?
End Trace Mode for Comment # 35.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]